Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Ife - Bab 2

    Uploaded by

    ary yunian putri
    2 views28 pages

    Original Title

    Ife_Bab 2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views28 pages

    Ife - Bab 2

    Uploaded by

    ary yunian putri

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 28
    Community Development in an Uncertain World Vision, analysis and practice Jim Ife 2 CAMBRIDGE ap UNIVERSITY PRESS Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective T" NVPROAGH TO community work developed in this book rests on three principal founclations, The fist is an ecological perspective, which is the subject of this chapter The second, a social justice perspective, wil be discussed in chapter 3. And ‘he third, 9 post Enlightenment perspective, wil be discussed in chapter 4, Each per- “peetive has been influential in stimulating community-based solutions to problems ‘an In promoting community development practice, The extent to which the three Perspectives are conceptually distinct i an interesting point for discussion, This will be {aken upin chapter 8, where the three perspectives are considered together, leading to ‘vision of an alternative society in which the concept of community and the process of ‘community development play a major role ‘The ecological perspective outlined later in this chapter derives from the Green critique ofthe current social, economic and politcal order. This critique represents a powerful and fundamental challenge to many of the accepted norms of social and Political discourse tis a challenge that, in the twenty-first century, can no longer be 'gnored, and which will inevitably play a major role in the shaping ofa future society @ Crisis ‘The threat of impending crisis has always been a part ofthe human condition. Such Uhreats constantly remind us of the precariousness of human existence, Religious prophets have frequently foretold the end either ofthe worl, or of ‘civilisation as we ‘know it, based on anything from personal revelation tothe reading of sacred texts, to the interpretation of signs and portents in the natural world, In this they have been joined by others who fear thatthe world that they cherish and value cannot last and ‘ho see only a bleak future, Indeed, a very human response to change, of whatever Sort sto seek toholdon tothe familar andto fear theloesof things we value. Nostalgia for ‘the good old days’ and a concer about future threats are not confined to the ay the human experience throughout recorded history. aliged, and a crisis has proved to be real and soon. At other times, especially nded, and this can then lead to ssent, but have been a part of worst fears are Te nic collapse, natural disasters and ars prove to be unfou! yever happen’ ith us, there are three reasons serious pre sometimes people's serious: war, econom with millenarian prophecies, fe ccency as in the phrase ‘Don't worry, Tl n always wit ty are particularly significant and require Jlenarian prophecies, the threats we s, on the basis compla ‘Nithough it appears that a fear of crisis why the current crises facing humanit attention. The first is that, unlike the various mil 1e foretold not by religious prophets but by scientist notof religious insight or divine revelation, but rather as the result of painstaking and satensve research, They demand to be taken seriously, and cannot be simply dis- ‘missed as the work of ‘prophets of doom’, despite the rhetoric of climate-change deniers and others who seek to minimise the serious crises facing the contemporary world The second reason for particular concem is that we are facing not one single crisis but several. Not only is climate change a major threat but soalsois the impending food crisis, the crisis of inadequate water supply, desertification and deforestation, topsoil erosion, the overfishing of the oceans, the continuing poisoning of the bio- phere through air, water and soil pollution and food additives, species extinction, rmass movernents of people (the ‘refugee crisis’ seems sure to escalate), the resource crisis including Peak Oi’, and other pressures of ver-population, With these crises will come three associated crises - an economic crisis, a political crisis and the threat of nuclear warfare as the institutions of government, global capital and civil society find they cannot cope with the demands on them and that ‘business as usual’ is not an option (Shearman & Smith 2007, Hamilton 2010). “There will be some disagreement about the significance and severity of some these crises (eg the debate about Peak Oil), but itis hard to avoid the conclusion that by the middle of the twenty-first century the world will be affected not just by one crisis but by 1 ‘perfect storm’ of multiple crises that will serve to reinforce each other, resulting in the deaths of many millions (ifnot billions) of people, and in poverty, dislocation and. misery for many more. The threat of these multiple crises is overwhelming: while humanity may be able to cope effectively with one or even two of these, it is surely toommuch to expect that we will be able to address them all “The third reason for particular concer is that we have been repeatedly warmed, yet cour political leaders refuse to act. The institutions that were established to regulate ‘human activity have proved to be unwilling or unable to act in the collective interests of currently perceive a ‘humanity, the response has characterstically been ‘to litle, too late’. Policies aimed at addressing climate change, for example, are grossly inadequate (Spratt & Sutton 2008, Kolbert 2006), and are set alongside policies that encourage economic growth and 32 | Community Development in an Uncertain World y | the continued d lepletion of Governmer oo nt that ‘the Australia through relucta the major cris Politics anda 5. Such as the repeated assurances ofthe Australian ae time industry has a bright future’. Whether itis anes 1 inability of political leaders to act effectively on ieee anity has resulted in a disillusionment with traditional a ae —s in both the political process and politicians. eee ae "8 cTises have led Green thinkers to seek radical alternatives, and =e five the Green position a sense of urgency and inevitability. From 2 *Pective, change is not aluxury that can be postponed until the time is Fight: the problems are urgent and immediate, and failure to act could place the future of ‘human civilisation, and indeed the very survival ofthe human race (as well as many other species), at risk. At different times, and in different places, different problems assume importance in popular consciousness. in the 1970s, for example, the resource crisis was of major Public concern, and the need for nuclear disarmament was @ major issue in the 1980s. From the late 1980s, problems of changing the ecological balance received ‘more attention, and global warming dominated the debate in the 2000s, atleast until 2008 when the fragility of the global financial system became evident. In places like ‘Tasmania and British Columbia, oss of wildemess always seems to be an issue of public significance, although it waxes and wanes elsewhere. Yet despite the vagaries of public awareness and media coverage, all these problems are still with us, and the indications are that each is getting worse. Each is sufficient to cause major concern, and requires immediate and significant attention at local, national and global levels. ‘They potentially threaten the long-term, or even medium-term, survival of the human race, or atthe very least of ‘ivilistion’ Horer-Dixon 2006). Taken together, they indicate an overall crisis of enormous magnitude, and itis only when they are ‘considered together that the seriousness of the coming period of crisis can be fully appreciated & Environmental responses and Green responses In considering the responses to these crises, an important distinction needs tobe made ‘between what will here be referred to as environmental, responses and Green responses. Other writers have used different terminology, such as light gren and dark green (Dobson 1995), environmental and ecological (Bookchin 1991), or deep and shallow ecology (Fox 1990). Environmental responses to ecological problems have two important character- istics First, they seek to solve specific problems by finding discrete solutions. Thus, the problem of global warming is to be solved by reducing greenhouse gases; ‘problems of resource depletion by alternative technologies; problems of pollution Chapter 2. Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 33 by anti-pollution technology; problems of population by family planni problems of loss of wilderness by creating protected areas; proble, extinction by endangered species programs; and so on. Each probl and a specific solution is sought. Such an approach is characteristic which has played a dominant role in the Western world view within and technological ‘progress’ has developed (Saul 1992, Postman 1999, Macy 2007). PB Programs, TS OF species lem is isolated, linear thinking which industrial 1993, Torgerson ‘The second characteristic of environmental responses is that they seek solutions within the existing social, economic and political order. It is not seen as necessary to change the nature of society in any fund: in that they are all consequences of the major underlying problem; namely the unsustainabilityof| theexisting order. it 34 | Community Deyelonment in an Uncertain World 5, which seeks to apply ecological principles to the solving of environmental problen inevitably requires a more holistic perspective than the conventional linear approach If environmental problems are seen as the result of the social, economic and political system, the nature of the problem fundamentally changes, Conventional approaches to the envitonment see the problems as physical problems, to do with air, water, pollutants, chemical reactions soils, climate, ‘ecosystems’, temperature and 0 ‘on, thus requiring essentially physical and technical solutions. Therefore the physical sciences are seen as the major disciplinary base for dealing with these problems; the physical sciences form the basis of most courses in ‘environmental science’, and physical scientists are seen as the ‘experts' in environmental issues, The Green per- spective, by contrast, sees environmental problems as essentially social, economic and political problems. They are caused by the kind of society we have developed, and to understand and deal with environmental problems we must seek wisdom and exper- tise from the social, economic and political sciences, rather than merely from the physical sciences and technologies, which are really able to deal only with the symptoms. “The perspective of this book accepts the Green, rather than the: environmental, view of ecological problems, Ifthe ecological crisis is to be effectively resolved, it will be through social, economic and political change, rather than through scientific and technological progress. Community work is potentially one of the most effective ways to develop a more sustainable society, and is thus directly relevant to a Green analysis. ‘The expertise of community workers, in terms of both knowledge and skills, has much to contribute to the Green movement; it is therefore not surprising that the Green movement has been one of the forces behind an upsurge of interest in community development. @ Themes within Green analy: While the Green perspective accepts the fundamental social-economic-political basis for the ecological crisis, and the need for fundamental change, there is some disagreement in the Green literature about the basic analysis, or exactly what it is that needs to change. Not surprisingly, Green literature reflects the divisions that can be found in broader social science writing, and different perspec- tives that have been brought to bear on other social problems are reflected in the a and analysis of issues raised by the ecological crisis. Some of these ferent ives are ie i = ae = ae below, but space restrictions require (see table 2.1, overleaf) superficially and inevitably oversimplified Chapter? Founda ter 2. Foundations of community development: An ecologi Inte 2.1. Schools of Green thought 5 Proposed solution —J ee fon of major problem enna | socialist society oe |e oecenasatn acl conta, bene fes'shacram | Hierrcy, goverment, bueauc3e7 Deena governen Feminist revolution, valuing women’s rnder oppression Ecoteninsm | Fatarchy utes, ending gender OPP oxy eal ancl chon. «049 al - mindless technological ‘progress’ No-growth society fantigrowth | Growth (economic, population, 9 consumption, etc) 1 Sustainable economics, including ‘externalities 2 Decentralised economics ‘Greed Conventional economic theory ‘Work and the | Definitions of work, lance onthe labour market | New definitions of work and leisure, Iabourmarket | 35 dstibutve mechanism ‘guaranteed basic income Soba! Dominance and exploitation of South bythe | Global equity, appropriate development evelopment | North, global inequity, ‘development’ co-hilosophy | Anthropocetic word view Ecocentic word view BREE Rh | Nicaea tv. tm Holistic systemic paradign, inka, thinking Eco-socialism Eco-socialists argue thatthe ecological criss is essentially the consequence of capital- ism. In an extension of a Marxist analysis, the growth and industrialisation that have accompanied the development of capitalism are seen as having resulted in waste, overconsumption and pollution, together with a lack of responsibilty for the health of the planet. The environment, as well as an oppressed and alienated workforce, has Paid the price for capitalism's successes, The ideology of capitalism has emphasised individualism and an exploitative relationship not only with the working class but also with the land and natural resources. From this perspective, the solution to the ecological crisis lies with a form of socialism. Adequate protection for the environment, and conservation of resources, ‘can be more easily achieved through a collectivist or communist system, The need for 2 transition toa socialist society is therefore given added urgency by the gravity of the cological crisis. Eco-socialism suggests that itis only through the elimination (or at 36 | Community Development in an Uncertain World means of produc: lective values ii realign’ ‘alues inherent in a sustainable society can be Eco-anarchism cere mnt Siemans pesitionWai-anchinde We sahen iy the ape-wrenstint. ‘Toe7 maintain thet the ecologenl crise isa result ofthe structures of domination and control exemplified by government, business, military forces and other forms of egulation. To anarchists, these structures deny human freedom and the potential to enjoy nature. They limit genuine human interaction and human potential. They have alienated human beings from the natural world, as a result of which people have Geveloped ecologically disastrous practices, Eco-anarchists therefore seek a society where there is minimal (oro) central control, where decisions are taken by individuals, or in small localised community groupings. instead of hierarchical forms of social organisation, they prefer decentralised, autonomous and local forms of organisation, based on ecological principles, or ‘social ecology’ to use the words of Murray Bookchin (1990, 1991), perhaps the most influential eco-anarchist writer. There is a long history of anarchist writers showing a concem for the natural environment, and a longing to ‘get back to nature’, in their quest for freedom from oppressive structures (Marshall 1992a, 1992). For example, the work of Thoreau (21854), writing in the nineteenth century, would not be out of place in a collection of contemporary Green writing. Theres indeed an element of anarchist thinking in much of the current Green literature, specifically in the rejection of the dehumanising and alienating characteristics of large centralised goverment (and non-govermment) structures, and in the advocacy of a ‘small is beautiful’ philosophy. Eco-feminism ‘While eco-socialists see the problem in terms of capitalism, and eco-anarchists see it in terms of structures of domination and control, eco-feminists see the problem of an «ecologically insane world primarily in terms of patriarchy and its consequences (Mellor 1992, Plumwood 1993, Salleh 1997, Warren 2000). From this point of view, patriarchal structures of domination, oppression and control have resulted in a competitive, ‘acquisitive and exploitative society. A patriarchal society has ultimately proved to be ‘unsustainable, and is causing environmental disasters from which itis proving inca- able of extricating itself. ‘Thus, the change that eco-feminists perceive as needed is the change embodied in the feminist movement, whereby patriarchal structures are challenged, dismantled, deconstructed and replaced. Of course the feminist movement, like the other Chapter? Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 37 ent and conflicting strands ang tion, has differ a detail here. Liberal ferninists to explore these in wuraged and supported to ‘compete alify for inclusion in the eco movements described in U emphases, and there is not space who simply argue that women should be encol cffectvely with men within existing structures do not a a feminist movement for the purposes ofthis analysis, as they are : ly eases akan of the exiting enti, weblcrc ntel plliceh ena, OF 0S FF in requires ‘the work of structural feminist writers, who argue that @ feminist analysis 7 : 4.on different organisational principles, seeking to i lace individualism replace competitive structures with cooperative structures, to repl with genuine collective decision-making, and to value all people rather than to support ers, Poststructural the development of a society base the domination, control, oppression and exploitation of some by oth feminism emphasises discourses of oppression, the way patriarchy has dominated discourses of power, and seeks to deconstruct such discourses and to validate the voices of the marginalised. Some feminist writers also recognise the importance of characteristics traditionally ascribed to women, such as nurturing, caring, sharing, community and peace as at least as important as (if not more important than) charac- teristics traditionally ascribed to men, such as individual competition, aggression, domination, exploitation and a war-like nature, Eco-Luddism Another strand within Green writing is the critique of technology, arguing that unbridled technological development, far from bringing boundless benefits for human- ity, creates more problems than it solves, and is largely responsible for the problems of the world today. Using the term Luddism to describe this position is not intended to be derogatory; although the word Luddite has become a term of abuse levelled at people who mistrust new technologies, it can also be argued that a healthy mistrust of new technologies is precisely what has been lacking during the period of industrial capitalism ‘The Luddites of the early nineteenth century, and other anti-technology movements that both preceded and followed them, were in effect articulating a simple but extremely significant view: namely, that social goals must not be subordinated to economic goals, and that technological development can have negative human ‘consequences (Harrison 1984, Hobsbawm & Rudé 1969). This strikes at the very core of the spirit of the Industrial Revolution, and questions its fundamental assumption that technological development is for the good of all. It is srmall wonder that the Luddites and those in related movements were ruthlessly repressed by thie authorities. Because these were essentially working-class movements, without the ‘benefit’ of literate and articulate representatives who could express their views in the respectable vocabulary 38: | Community Development in an Uncertain World of social and political philosophy not deserving serious consider today, and at lasts falling on In the late twentieth cent champions, in such writers Mander (1991), These writers ', 1tis easy to dismiss them as ignorant and ill-informed, ation. Their message, however, is profoundly relevant more sympathetic ears, 'ury, the cause of the Luddites finally found its intellectual as Mich (1973), Schumacher (1973), Postman (1993) and argued that the popular view of technology as 'value-free’ 1S.a myth. The issue has become still more critical in the early twenty-first century, with the explosion of computer ‘technology to include social media, dramatically affecting the Social interactions of billions of people (Manzini 2011, Harding 2011, De Young & Princen 2012). There is also the dramatic increase in the use of surveillance technology, such as CCTV cameras, which are typically used to reinforce powerful interests and to exert additional control over the most vulnerable. We have developed technologies with effects we do not understand, and unsustainability and uncertainty are consequences of our Tapidly evolving technological society. Such a view relies heavily on the analysis of Ivan Mich, who has argued that technologies in a number of areas - medicine, transport, education ~ have developed to the point where the disadvantages outweigh the advan- tages. Other writers (Bowers 2000, Baym 2010, Bauerlein 2011, Turkle 2011, Carr 2010) have applied a comparable critique to computers, information technology, the internet and social media, pointing out that we are so excited about the advantages that we lose sight of the negatives: the devaluing of any human ‘knowledge’ or ‘experience’ that cannot be Teduced to digital impulses; the increasing individualisation as people retreat into cyber- ‘space and no longer interact with other human beings; and the way in which information technology is redefining the dominant culture in ways that have received little critique, From this perspective, the traditional ‘environmentalist’ response to ecological prob- Jems, namely to seek a technological solution, is self-defeating. Advanced technology is ‘seen as part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Further technological research and development, while undoubtedly providing some benefits, wil do soonly atincreasing ‘social and environmental cost, and there is likely to be a net cost rather than a net benefit to humanity. Such a position advocates lower rather than higher levels of technology as the answer, seeking to develop technologies that areon a more ‘human scale’, beingable to ‘be used and contuolled by ordinary People, and directly related to their: wellbeing. Anti-growth Some writers in the Green movement perceive growth to be the major problem ‘The existing order is premised on the desirability and inevitabilit i ‘Sconomic growth, population growth, the growth of urban areas, the growth of afflu- ence and the growth of organisations. Bigger js equated with s as better, and one of the Vr enteriafor success and quality is for things to be growing. Economic growth is Chapter2. Foundation: 12. Foundations of community development; An ecological Perspective | 39 ic policy, and asthe mechanism by which, jm : ity wellbeing will bem ners are required to dete using, land use, water, pollution and so on wth in size, tumover and profit, and the esses that become big businesses. The being better, is so ingrained that itis 4 required) to grow, whether it be aintained, It is assumed rmine how cities will 1 regarded as a primary goal of £0” employment’, pt that cities will continue to grow. cope with’ growth in terms of transport “The health of a business is measured by its BF cries’ of business are of small busin rosperity and commun and plan' “success st assumption of the value of growth, and of bigger barely questioned. Everything is expected (indee economies, cities, businesses, community organisatl universities, resource consumption or tourism. on The problem, of course, is that we live in a finite world. Growth cannot continue fo) ever, as the finite nature of the earth limits both the resources available and the extent to which the costs of growth can be bome. Such writers as David Suzuki (Suzuki, ‘McConnell & Mason 2007) have argued that there are clear signs that the natural limits to growth are being reached and that growth cannot continue. The environmental crisis is the result of growth having outstripped the earth's capacity to cope with its consequences. This critique of growth is closely related to the concept of sustainability. The existing system is seen as unsustainable, and further growth only makes it more so. Hence, an alternative based on principles of sustainability is advocated. This alternative would effectively limit growth and would ensure that, as much as possible, resources are used only at a rate at which they can be replaced, and that output to the environment is limited to the level at which it can be absorbed. The concept of sustainability is central to ‘a Green perspective, and will be discussed later in this chapter. ions, professional football leagues, Alternative economics Another strand of Green analysis, closely related to the ‘no-growth’ Position, is altemative economics. This perspective sees the major problem as being the economic ‘wisdom’ that has developed within industrial capitalism, as it has encouraged ‘overconsumption, waste, growth and the devaluing of the environment. It thus seeks to develop a new economics, based on ecological principles. There are two main streams within alternative ‘Green’ economics. The first ‘seeks to redefine conventional economic: analysis to incorporate the. ‘concems of environ- ‘mentalists. Conventional analysis, in calculating costs and benefits, has treated environmental factors as externalities, and therefore has not included them in the comparison of costs and benefits. Thus, an industry that discharges toxic waste into the environment has been able todo so without cost, and the cost tothe environment is not included in the calculation of the nett benefit of this: industry to the economy. Thereis, of course, a cost associated with having to clean up the environment, but this is not bore 40 1 Community Development in an Uncertain World Gisa'wins le or governments far away from the source asi the acid rain, = °F nuclear fallout. similarly, social costs tend not to be included in “ational economic calculation 's. The social costs or benefits of a particular industry or activity, like the environmental aayingonivey on Costs, are notoriously difficult to measure (some would Teh cn POnse of conventional economics has been to treat them as ‘“xternalities and therefore to leave them out of the calculation. A telated problem with conventional ‘economics is its definition of valu Of economic productivity or market Price, That such phenomena as wilderness, hative forests, peace, security and endangered species can have intrinsic value is not acknowledged in conventional economic ealculatione, ‘Thus, in an example often cited Y Greens, conventional economics dictates that a standing tree has no value; it is only when tis cutdown and becomes a resource’ that itcan be regarded as valuable. In this way, conventional economics can fly in the face of what, from an ecological Perspective, is self-evident, terms ‘The existing system, adopting conventional ‘economic wisdom’, effectively acts ‘oreduce or destroy things of value such as beauty, peace, wildemess, security, endan- fered species and community, while at the same time creating undesirable outcomes Such as pollution, overcrowding, congestion, health problems, stress, ugliness and overconsumption, Anumber of Green economists are seeking to develop an alternative ‘economics that does take account of these environmental and social factors, by devel- ‘ing ways in which they might be measured and incorporated in an economic analysis that more truly reflects ecological and social realty (e.g Jacobs 1991) ‘The second main strand of alternative Green economics seeks @ more fundamental change, beyond merely redefining the way economic equations are calculated Hazel Henderson (1988, 1991), Paul Ekins (1986, 1992) and Manfred Max-Neef (1991; See aso Ekins & Max-Neef 1992) were particularly significant writers in establishing this perspective, They argued fora fundamental paradigm change inthe way economic and social phenomena are described. Their vision of economics is embedded in a broader vision ofa change of human values, incorporating many of the other Perspec- tives described in this chapter. Another important alternative economic perspective, which, ike Henderson, Ekins ‘and Max-Neef, goes further than the redefinition of economic equations, is proposed by those who seek a more decentralised and community-based economic system, For them, the main problem with conventional economic activity is that itis out of the ‘each of ordinary people, who are disempowered and impoverished by transnational capitalism. This transfers profits from poor areas (whether ‘countries in the South or ‘economically disadvantaged’ communities in the North) to richer areas, thereby ChaPIEF2 Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective ta ity. It also contributes to ecological destruc. qui + closely related to the lives and experi. count of environmental sensitivities increasing economic inequality and ines tion by promoting economic activity that is no ences of ordinary people, and which takes no s See oe enemy f localis This analysis leads to the advocacy 0 eee ee (shuman 2012, Hallsmith & ticular relevance for generation, community banks and credit schemes, ™! local currency systems (often known as LETS) and so on Lietaer 2011, Cortese 2011, Greco 2009). This, of course, has pal community development, and will be taken up further in chapter 10. jumach! ‘Throughout this literature on Green economics the perspective of EF. Sch has been particularly er, who helped to popularise the maxim ‘Small is beautiful’, important. Schumacher sought to articulate alternative, human-scale economics and technology, and was a pioneer in the alternative economics movement (Schumacher 1973, Lutz 1992). His work is also relevant in the critique of technology, described above in the section on eco-Luddism. proaches to Work, leisure and the work ethic ‘The nature and definition of work is fundamental in moder industrial society. The labour market is the primary mechanism for allocating financial resources to individuals and families, and hence for giving people the capacity to participate in the economic and social life of the community. It is also a significant means of allocating status within society and, through the trade union movement and various forms of industrial welfare, a mechanism for determining social rights. Paid labour is seen as the primary way for most of society's social and economic goals to be achieved, despite the fact that much socially necessary and useful work is unpaid; this especially applies to work traditionally under- taken by women. A clear distinction is made between work (whether paid or unpaid) and leisure, although there is also a recognition that what is work for one person may be leisure for another, and many human activities typically belong in both work and leisure categories (eg. community service, playing football, gardening and making music). It must be emphasised that the way in which work is understood is historically a recent phenomenon, and is a product of the development of industrial capitalism (Weber 1930). Working hard has not always been highly valued, and is not necessarily valued in non-Western cultural traditions, but this value has been an essential part of capitalist development. Similarly, the distinctions between paid work, unpaid work and leisure have not always been so clear as they are today; in feudal society, for example, these were understood quite differently. From a Green perspective, it can be argued that understandings of work and leisure, the role of work, the division of labour and the labour market are part of the problem that hhas caused the ecological crisis now facing the world. Certainly the world of work 42 | Community Development in an Uncertain World Ccpamen og etE maj hrs an ty © ene 03 modem societies, ana nderemployment) is one of the major social problem: ‘ * 8nd conventional economics seems unable to deal with it effectively without promoting levels of economic gyowth that are ecologically unsustainable. The ‘eo liberal trend towards casulisation of the labour force, and the continued demand from managers for more flexibility’, ave resultedin increasinginsecurity for many. Some Green writers therefore have suggested that radical reformulations of work and leisure ate fundamental to a successful Green altemative. This critique is closely associated with those of the eco-socalists and with the writers in the area of alternative economics. The work of André Gorz (1983) has been particularly significant in this regard. Gorz suggested that economic and technological progress need not result in increased consumption and unemployment, but rather in shorter working hours and improved quality of life for all. This requires social rather than economic criteria to be paramount in the determination of how jobs are to be defined and distributed. Its an indication of the dominance of the neo-liberal narrative that such an obvious idea has not been taken seriously in the three decades since Gorz was writing. The distinction between work and leisure would also be less marked in a future Green society. This would be achieved partly by making work more community-based, and partly by seeking other forms of meeting people's basic income needs than through the labour market, for example through a guaranteed minimum income scheme, thereby allowing people to derive status from unpaid as well as paid activities. Global development Another strand of analysis that has been significant in the development of the Green perspective has been the work done on global development, by such writers as Robert Chambers (2005), Ted Trainer (2010a, 2010b), Susan George (2004, 2010) and Vandana Shiva (2005). Many of the worst environmental problems occurin nations that are characterised as ‘the South’, where there are high levels of pollution in urban areas, land degradation on a massive scale and high levels of population growth, and where wilderness areas such as rainforests are being rapidly destroyed. Much of this environ- mental destruction is the result of govermments of the South seeking to promote ‘economic development, through developing industry, more ‘efficient’ land use and the exploitation of natural resources. Itisimportant to emphasise that these governments are merely seeking to emulate ‘the economic success of the more ‘developed’ nations, which followed a similar route to economic prosperity through the process of industrialisation, and which were often able to profit from the exploitation of their colonies, now the ‘underdeveloped’ nations of the South. Often they are merely following the prescriptions of the Intemational hapter2. Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 43 neo-liberal requirements on governments ind, which typically places Soe ee He ‘Thus, they are understandably resentful of criticism seeking financial assistance. Thus. onmentalists in more affluent nations, arguing that they should not be ag same opportunities for economic development, and that it was the Sesila exploitation of the countries of the North that has led them to be disadvan- taged, The problem, ofcourse is that i is becoming clea that the world is unable to suppor the affluence ofthe North for very much longer, ad if the whole world were to develop to the same level as the industrialised North there would be rapid escalation of the ecological crisis. The economic development of nations of the South therefore is simply hastening the coming of the ecological Armageddon. This analysis creates a moral problem for environmentalists of the North. Clearly governments of the South should be opposed in their ecologically disastrous policies of dam-building, timber-felling, land-clearing, nuclear power development, encourage- ‘ment of high-polluting industry and so on, for the sake of the planet. However, to do so means that, given the current economic and political system, those nations will be denied access to the economic benefits that societies of the North (and their environ- mentalists) enjoy. Such an argument cannot be justified on the grounds of global equity, which leaves Northem environmentalists open to the charge of using the environment to perpetuate colonialist domination, ‘The way out of this dilemma is for Northem environmentalists to accept that the responsibility for change, and for showing how to develop ecological sustainability, lies with their own societies (Trainer 2010a, 2010b). This means that those in the industri- alised world have to embark on a program of dramatically reducing consumption, as it is still the North that is responsible for the bulk of pollution, waste and overconsump- tion of resources. Thus, the North, rather than the South, as the beneficiary of the supposed benefits of industrialisation, has the responsiblity for demonstrating that quality of life need not be equated with an economically defined ‘standard of living’, and itis unreasonable to expect nations of the South to follow such a path without the North showing a lead, To use Trainer's words, ‘The rich must live more simply, so that the poor may simply live’ (1985: 64). The inability of the North and the South to reach agreement on climate change sa clear example ofthe way such thinking has yet to be adopted by political leaders. anh as coe fae Es ses problems ofthe South should not be consequence of the policies of the North, en mc at a of such writers as Geor atid Ag en neta to the analysa 8° (2004, 2010), Norgaard (1994), Hurrell & Woods (1999) and Sh (2005),has not primarily served the needs ‘of people in the ies bei es rather the needs of transnational capital, and has efecey nee ree Oo Mal, and has effectively supported the affluent because they are the 44-1 Communi | Community Dévelopmentin an Uneitsin world « lifestyles of the North. This approach to development has been dictated by ‘authorities from agencies based in the North, and has operated in favour of the interests they represent, It has been supported by the actions of such bodies as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization, as well as by military force. Thus, the North can be seen as betig directly responsible for the environmental problems of the South, This is another powerful argument why change in Norther societies is essential if ecological sustainability is to be achieved at a global level ‘The vast differences between the ‘developed’ North and the ‘underdeveloped! south are a clear indictment of the inadequacy of the global capitalist order to bring about global equity. From a Green perspective, there are two significant points to be made. The first is that responsibility for change to ecological sustainability in the South requires fundamental changes in the North. The second is that the holistic and sys- temic approach of the Green position emphasises that we live in one finite world, and that all people are interconnected in terms of their current existence and ultimate fate Human civilisation will survive only if there is a radical change to ecological sustain- ability in both the North and the South. Thus, the oneness of all people transcends national and cultural boundaries, and the social and environmental policies of other nations are the legitimate concem of all. Not only is it legitimate for environmental activists in the North to pressure countries of the South to adopt better environmental practices but also it is just as legitimate (if not more so) for people of the South to pressure Norther governments to mend their ways. (See chapters 8 and 9 for a fuller discussion of global issues and colonialist development) Eco-philosophy ‘The strand of Green thought described as eco-philosophy seeks to establish a philo- sophical basis for environmentalism. Central writers in this area have been Robyn Eckersley (1992), Joanna Macy (2007) and Warwick Fox (1990). They have identified the essentially anthropocentric nature of the dominant 'Western’ world view, which sees humans as in some way special and different from other living beings (Huggan 2010). From this perception has developed the view that the human species can and should dominate the world and subordinate the interests of other species to the interests of humans. This essentially exploitative stance is also applied to the non-living world. Therefore human action is evaluated in terms of its impact on other humans rather than on other species or the planet as a whole, and humans are not seen as part of the complex web of interactions that is the ‘natural world’. Such a world view is deeply embedded in the Western intellectual tradition, and is reinforced by the Judaeo-Christian religious tradition (see Marshall 1992). Chapter2 Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 45 1a view and environmental destruction the need to develop an alternative Each develops an approach in which humans worl ‘The connection between such @ x, Macy and Eckersley argue n for action nthropocentrism), obvious, and Fo: ee philosophical framework as @ justific 1s opposed to a _ eo eee ‘4 with other living beings, b' falue. This leads to the allocat jing it 1s of its it ly judging it in term: ed ry if the changes required to yut rather it is the ‘ion of intrinsic charactel are not treated as special when compare entire ecosystem that is ascribed primary v a value to the natural world, instead of sim : is, i cess: value to the human species. This, it is argued, is ne Ye fmt ees bringabout ecological sustainability are tobe achieved. It ake i ie lisct philosophical justification for the alternative economic views i i digenous ‘This perspective has been given an added dimension by the contribution of Indige in holistic eco- wniters and teachers, Indigenous People around the world have maintained a philosophy, emphasising the interconnectedness and interdependence between people and the natural world. Their life is based on an ecocentric world view, whereby People ° relationships with the land, animals and plants can be as important as relationsips between people themselves (Diamond 2013, Tumer 2010, Wallace 2009, Sveiby & Skuthorpe 2006, Mander & Tauli-Corpuz 2006). The Indigenous contribution to ecocentric thinking, and to community development, will be discussed in more detail in chapter 4. Such an analysis is also used to justify the animal rights movement and vegeta- rianism, causes that are espoused by many (although not all) in the Green movement, with varying degrees of commitment. To some, these are essential components of being Green; to some they are important ideas but not central; while to others they are largely irrelevant. Whether such views are an essential part of a Green Position is an interest- ing area for debate, although somewhat outside the boundaries of this book, so it will not be pursued here. The issue will, however, re-emerge in the discussion of ethical issues in chapter 16. The field of deep ecology also needs to be mentioned at this point. At the risk of gross oversimplifcation, deep ecology can be described as an approach to ecology charac- terised by a profound integration of social, economic, personal and spiritual values within an ecocentric perspective, It emphasises personal development and growth as well as a broader analysis, also personal oneness with, and hence identification with, the natural world. When argued by its leading exponent, the Norwegian ecologist Arne Naess (1989, 2008), itis a serious, thoughtful and challenging perspective that has a lot to offer in terms of understanding the consequences of a genuinely integrated and holistic position. It can be regarded as the logical outcome of the ecocentric analysis of Fox, Macy and Eckersley. Unfortunately, deep ecology has been adopted by various ‘fringe’ and ‘new age’ ‘Wnters, who use the analysis in a more superficial way to incorporate various ‘fads’ in a 46 | Community Devetopment in an Unce! Green position. It has also led to the argument that says, ‘To change the world you must begin with yourself’, simplistically seeing personal growth as the solution to all the world's problems. While personal growth is certainly important and an essential component of community development (see chapter 11), the danger of such a perspec- tive is that it readily accepts dominant discourses of power, ignores the important Structural factors that both cause and perpetuate the dominant social, economic and Political order, and leads people to believe that simply by meditating, wearing crystals, Teading Tarot cards or undergoing body therapy they can change the world (Tacey 2000). This is not necessarily to deny the value of these activities in themselves - many People find them important in helping to give meaning and purpose to their lives - but rather to emphasise that while personal growth may be desirable, and indeed neces- sary, itis certainly not sufficient for effective social change. New paradigm thinking ‘The terms paradigm and new paradigm were overused in the 1980s and 1990s, and have somewhat dropped out of usage since, but the concept of a new paradigm is important in understanding the Green perspective. In this context, paradigm means the world view within which theory, practice, knowledge, science, action and so on are concep- ‘ualised. The paradigm is the set of assumptions, ideas, understandings and values (usually unstated) that sets the rules of what is to count as relevant or irrelevant; what questions should and should not be asked; what knowledge is seen as legitimate; and what practices are acceptable. Acceptance of a paradigm is normally a matter of unstated, and often unconscious, consensus. For example, the dominant paradigm for scientific research and practice accepts objectively measurable and verifiable Phenomena as proper objects for study, but rejects phenomena that cannot be thus characterised; hence astronomy is a ‘proper’ science while astrology is not, ‘real’ medicine includes drug therapy and surgery but not magic or faith healing, and so on, Itis the paradigm, in other words, that defines what is ‘proper’ or legitimate know!- edge and activity. TS. Kuhn, who argued the importance of paradigms in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1970), described how scientific activity takes place within a certain Paradigm that, after a time, proves to be inadequate as a framework for new knowl- edge. Asa result there is a ‘revolution’ resulting i the development of a new paradigm, and a reorientation of scientific thought within a new world view. The transition from Newronian physic othe physics of relativity and quantum theory is a clear example of such a paradigm shift (or ‘scientific evolution’, to use Kuhn's terminology). Although Kuhn, applied the notion, of paradigm to scientific. endeavour, ‘een applied much more broadly. Writers from a vatiety of disciplines eu many of the problems facing the world can be understood as resulti the idea has iggested that ing from the hepter2. Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective a «variously defined a8 Western, indus ernist and a number of jhe ‘dominant para Jenderson 1991 echanist a, Enlightenment, ™ chal 999, Capra 1982, F particular paradigm inadequacy of ewtonian trial, Cartesian, Newton eit other ways (Saul 1992, Hind 2007, Nichol = rn &e Ehrlich 1989). They SuBRest that this F fits for humanity: n, or world view, has now reached a point where itis 1 to solve the pressing i such writers Wo omnstel while it has had undoubted ben roblems of «that we wil be unabl p increasingly dysfunctional, an nye ta the day unless we develop an alternative Although not ues anal themselves as Green’, new paradigm thinkinghas been central ; is chapter the views described earlier in this chap Cae and incorporates many of ‘There are many strands of new para snant worl view thathasled the world tothe brink of be picked up and discussed further in chapter 4, whi ideas as a basis for community development. J, seeking to challenge t trophe. These will ment digm thinking ecological catas ich considers post-Enlighten! ® An ecological perspective In the midst of this diversity, is it possible to identify a central politcal theory? The diversity itself need not present a problem, as from Gr and a degree of theoretical and ideological | core of Green social and een perspective there is value in diversity, pluralism is an advantage; indeed if one were to accept a post modem Green view, such diversity would be essential. But if indeed the Green perspective is to provide a conceptual basis for community development, itis important to identify some core ideas that can be used as a basis for further discussion, although these may be con- tested and will be contextualised in different ways. Itis alsoimportant from the point of view of the Green movernent itself. Many of the above strands of thought reflect familiar strands in conventional social and political discourse: socialism, feminism, anarchism, alternative economics and so on. If the Green movernent is to offer some- thing new, itis essential to focus on what makes the ‘Green’ forms of these intellectual positions distinctive. What is the difference between eco-socialism and conventional socialism, between eco-feminism and feminism? What does the prefix eco- signify, other than an attempt to appear relevant to the needs of the day? The strands of Green analysis described above are not by and large mutually exclusive, and adoption of one does not exclude the adoption of another. There is no logical reason why a Green position could not be developed that incorporated some elements of most, ifnot all, of the perspectives outlined in this chapter. Indeed, many of the perspectives reinforce rather than contradict each other. tn developing a characteritically Green positon, there is a significant problem ‘egarding the definition of what is central toa Green perspective and what is peripheral, Many positions are claimed as part of the Green world view, some of which are quite extreme and which would be rejected by many people in the Green movement. Such views can also retard the cause of the Greens, by inviting negative publicity and providing ready ammunition to the Greens’ political opponents. The question, then, is how to determine the core of a Green position that will be internally consistent, will incorporate the central views of most people in the Green movernent, will provide a coherent frame- ‘work for action and will exclude the ‘baggage’ such a movement inevitably attracts. For the purpose of the remaining chapters of this book and the approach to com- munity development they describe, the core of the Green position is understood in terms of some basic principles of ecology, on the grounds that it is essentially an ecological perspective that turns socialism into eco-socialism, feminism into eco- feminism and so on. Because it relies on ecological principles, this perspective will be referred to as an ecological perspective rather than a Green perspective, even though it is grounded in the above discussion of Green political theory. This ecological perspective uses as unifying themes five basic principles of ecology; namely holism, sustainability, diversity, equilibrium and interdependence (see table 2.2). These are fundamental to any ecological approach, and apply both to the natural world (in traditional ecological environmental studies) and to the social, Table 2.2 An ecological perspective Ecological principle | Consequences 1 Hols Ecocentic philosophy Respect fore and nature Rejection of linear solutions ‘Organic change Relational eaity Conservation Reduced consumption ‘No-growth economics Constraints on technological development Anticapitalsm Valuing ditference ‘Nosingle answer Decentralsation Networking and lateral communication Lowerevel technology Globatocal Yinyang Gender Fightsresponsbties Peace and cooperation Critique ofthe ideology of ‘independence’ Importance of relationships Analyse relationships, not component parts Chapter2 Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 49 of this book, From these five m yy is the concel ie f the strands of Green writing prescriptions © n tural consequences: This perspective contains a degree sition that would probably be accepted by oe Green philosophy, although there f the thinking outlined politcal order, 1 nomic and = of the analyses ant principles, many described above emerge as na \d represent .d as at the core of rporates most o! Green thought. ‘me elements that a number of Greens take alities of of internal consistency an ‘most Greens as legitimate, an would be differences of emphasis. It also inco earlier in discussion ofthe diferent streams of ‘This perspective does not incorporate so th social for granted, specifically those dealing wit — gender, lass and race. These are dealt with in different ways by socialist ical and other approaches discussed above, but are not necessarily a part of the eos ve. framework, which is suggested here as a way to integrate the overall Green nie These need tobe justified on different grounds, which will be the task of chapter 1 justice issues such as inequi m, feminism Ecological principle 1: holism ‘The principle of holism requires that every event or phenomenon must be seen as part of a whole, and ‘that it can properly be understood only with reference to every other part of the larger system. This is opposed to linear thinking, which is a characteristic of the ‘dominant paradigm’ of Western thought. Thus, problems do not characteristically have ‘simple’ or linear solutions but must always be understood as manifestations of a wider system, as exemplified by the distinction between ‘ecological’ and ‘Green’ approaches outlined at the beginning of the chapter. The interdependence of phenomena is therefore critical (see below) and from this perspective is derived the classic ecological dictum ‘You can never do only one thing’: whatever one does will have ramifications throughout the system, often unanticipated. Therefore everything ‘must ideally be understood in terms ofits relationship and interaction with everything else. There is no beginning and no end to processes, and there are no clear boundarie instead phenomena (both physical and social) must be seen as part of a seamless web of complex interconnecting relationships. Rather than differentiation and classifica- tion, which have been characteristic of Western forms of analysis, integration and synthesis become fundamental. From this principle, a number of further principles can be derived. The intercon- nectedness of the holistic world view leads naturally to ecocentric rather than anthro- Pocentric perspectives, as argued by such writers as Fox (1990), Eckersley (1992), Macy 2007) and Naess (1989, 2008). Respect for all life, the intrinsic value of the natural world and, hence, a strong conservationist éthic follow naturally. Holism values generalist, rather than specialist approaches to problems and their solution, It also values organic change; attempts to bring about radical change to only one part of a system while 50 | Community Development in an Uncertain World sounds a note of caution about too strong an attachment to any of the streams of Green thought that see the ecological crisis in simplistic terms, and ascribe responsibility toa Single ‘evi, whether it be capitalism, patriarchy, technology, growth or the work ethic. A successful Green strategy would accept the legitimacy of most or all these analyses ‘at recognised complexity and interdependence. 'Pective also requires integrative links to be made between phe- Romena that have characteristically been regarded as distinct, such as knowledge and action, theory and Practice, fact and value. Such dualisms are a part of the dominant Positivist paradigm of the Western intellectual tradition (Fay 1975) and discourage the integrative approach required by the holistic perspective (Plumwood 1993). This is Particularly important in thinking about community development work, and will be taken up again in subsequent chapters. A holistic perspective also emphasises the importance of relationship. By empha- sising that everything is related to everything else, relationship becomes a central concern, There is an important school of thought that understands reality as relational (Gergen 2000, Spretnak 2011), which will be discussed further in chapter 4. This is a more profound understanding of holism and holistic thinking, but it is central to the ecological approach to community development described in later chapters. and seek strategies th The holistic pers Ecological principle 2: sustainability The principle of sustainability means that systems mustbe able to be maintained in the Jong term, that resources should be used only at the rate at which they can be replen- ished, that renewable energy sources should be utilised, that output to the environ- ment should be limited to the level at which it can adequately be absorbed, and that consumption should be minimised rather than maximised. Inevitably this would require a ‘no-growth’ approach to economics and social organisation, as well as the obvious environmental controls and conservation strategies (Mulder, Ferrer & van tente 2011). It would require a radical reformulation of economic policy and social organisation, as it would involve a system where becomin, g bigger was discouraged rather than valued. ‘The concept of sustainability was emphasised by Our Common Future, the Teport of the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), also referred toas the Brundtland Report, which is seen as a landmark document in ch: anging environmental awareness. Unfortunately this report stopped short. of explicitly developing the concept Chapter2. Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective st e it within more traditional f the desirability of growth ee Ekins 1992: 30-4), jevelopment, nd sought to defin al perceptions ©! land Report, 5 of sustainable d consciousness to the has effectively diluted uch a way as not to in the above terms, 3! onventions tique of the Brundtl ed in the report within the concept + igso closely linked in the publi uated, atleast implicitly), this 1d allowed it to be used ins munity, sustaina bstantive meaning..to the point th can be unapologetically of sustainability parameters, allowing C economic a fuller crit togo unchallenged (for sustainability was define andas the notion of development idea of growth (the two are often eq! the meaning of sustainability, am challenge the centrality of growth. Like the word cor” has been so abused that it is in danger of losing its sv! where the blatantly self-contradictory term sustainable grow’ used by politicians, business leaders and commentators. If understood within its proper ecological context t is very powerful, and requires a radical transformation of thy unsustainable order. Not only are unbridled growth and unnecessary consumption of sustainability clearly attacks the fundamentals of ble is a word that the concept of sustainability fe existing, blatantly unacceptable but also the concept traditional capitalist economics, which is predicated on growth and capital accumu lation. The same is true of conventional socialist economics, which has tended to accept the desirability of continuing growth. It can, however, be argued that there are varieties of each form of economics that are not incompatible with sustainability, and these tend tobe the smaller-scale, decentralised versions. In the case of capitalism, this takes the form of the localised market economy; in the case of socialism, it takes the form of decentralised democratic socialism. ‘Thus, the ecological principle of sustainability is readily compatible with some of the arguments of the eco-socialists and the eco-anarchists. It even has a clear link with the views of the eco-Luddites, as it can be suggested that unbridled technological development is also unsustainable. Such arguments would not necessarily invalidate technological development per se, but would require that such development occur f socially and environmentally determined reasons and be constrained by the need = develop sustainable rather than unsustainable technologies. This is in conts = perspective of technology within the dominant paradigm, which nna ‘ perceives technolog- ical development itself as worthwhile and which allows the technology to determin social and economic interaction (Postman 1993). . Ecological principle 3: diversity re Principle of diversity is another fundamental aspect of the ecological perspective. In nature, diverse organisms and systems evolve to meet the needs of we circumstances, and it is through diversit tu are able to develop, ity that nat - @ ral systems ls . a setback to one system or organism does not 2 R 1 Community Development in an Uncertain World necessarily mean disaster for the whole. For example, a diversity of species of wheat means that a disease may strike one or two but is unlikely to affect all. A diversity of cultures means that some at least will prove to be adaptable to new circumstances, uniformity is a recipe for ecological disaster. If there are effectively only two or three species of wheat in the world, a new disease will potentially wipe out all crops. And uniformity of culture may turn out to be uniformity of a maladaptive or destructive culture, resulting in the breakdown of human civilisation; indeed it could be argued that this is the current experience of cultural globulisation (see chapters 9 and 11) “The principle of diversity has not emerged only from a Green, or ecological. perspective: Postmodemist writers have argued that single modemist frameworks, or meta-narrauves, are no longer credible or viable in an era of postmodemnity, and that the ‘death of the rmeta-narrative' (Lyotard 1984) allows for, and even requires, the emergence of altemative narratives and discourses. Postmodemism both promotes and celebrates diversity simitary, feminism and the movement for gay and lesbian rights have emphasised the importance of diversity, and have seen diversity as something to be celebrated rather than as something to be stamped out through rational planning and imposed conformity “The principle of diversity maintains that there is not necessarily just one answer, OF one right way of doing things, and so encourages range of responses, It isin sharP contrast to, and much more modest than, the characteristic modernist tendency in Wester societies to seek the right answer, then impose it on the whole system ~ even the whole world - whether that answers the ‘best’strain of wheat toreplace all others, the ‘best’ form of economics, the ‘best’ new technology, the English language or @ uniform culture. The assumption that there must be one best answer is deeply ingrained ~ perhaps most clearly exemplified in the idea of "best practice’ ~ yet itis this assumption that is questioned by the principle of diversity. Diversity proceeds in a much more modest way, not arrogantly defining the “best” answer and imposingit, but encouraging a variety of ways of doing things, so that people ‘can leam from the experience of others and so that change can proceed cautiously on the basis of a variety of accumulated wisdom. There is no such thing as ‘best practice’, and difference, rather than uniformity, is valued. This essentially pluralist approach may be ctiticised as conservative in that it mistrusts ‘radical’ change, and indeed a Green position inherits a good deal from a classical conservative ideology (as opposed to the radical right), Conservatives ofthis type value what has evolved through natural processes, and ‘wam that attempts to ‘improve’ on it are only likely to make things worse. This is also typical of a conservationist position (it should be noted that the words conservative and = have te ee oe many Green causes can be justified by what is ‘conservs preservation of wilderness, Indigenous land rights, the preservation of species, natural beauty, heritage buildings and so on (Goodin 1992) Chapter? Foundation: jpter 2. Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | 53 iformity is consistent with a ma.) " than unl ty rathe! ; decentralisation. If diversity is value, jught, name ed, and encourage. ised structures and a dive the principle of divers! tenet of Green political tho then people should be allow and ways of doing things. Centtal bureaucratic control and regulation. achieved with maximum decentralisation of decist ry and so on. Many Green writel rr odin’s suggestion that this isnot Jogical principle of diversity is becomes inevitably part of 4, to find their own local solutions +e ato create uniformity through rse system is much more easily ‘on-making, control over resour- 15 (eg. Trainer 2010a, Mcintyre nomic activity A ‘Young & Princen 2012) have made decent nent of their vision for a Green future. Contrary to Gor a necessary consequence of a Green position, if the eco! included as a major focus, decentralisation in some form alised systems a major compo- a Green political agenda. In a decentralised system, which values diversi one decentralised community from another. Indeed, from a Green perspective, it is through horizontal communication that experience can be shared and lessons can be ty, there need not be isolation of learned, far more effectively than from central bureaucratic forms of communica- tion. Thus, change emerges from below, from the day-to-day experiences of ordinary people participating in decentralised structures, and change is organic rather than centrally planned. Such a view sits comfortably with the eco-anarchist position discussed earlier. ‘The question of decentralisation is, however, problematic for the Greens. Unless one takes an extreme anarchist position, there is a clear need for some form of centralised coordination, and perhaps even control, resulting from the interconnected- ness that is emphasised by the holistic perspective. Diversity may be valued, but this does not necessarily mean that local bodies can ‘go off and do their own thing’, which may affect others negatively. An interconnected world requires some form of coordi- nation, This issue willbe taken up in later chapters, but it also relates directly to the next ecological principle, that of equilibrium. Ecological principle 4: equilibrium Equilibrium emphasises not only the importance of the relationship between systems butalso the need to maintain a balance between them. In the natural world, this occurs through dynamic equilibrium, where changes are naturally monitored and alterations. made so that balance is maintained. Potentially conflicting systems have their inter- actions controlled in such a way that they are able to coexist, and even become dependent on each other. This applies to animal populations, vegetation, climate, atmosphere and so on. It is essential if systems are to survive in the long term and hence be sustainable (Suzuki, McConnell & Mason 2007) 54 | Community Development in an Uncertain World Thus, dualisms ~ such as male and female, yin and yang, competition and cooperation, global and local, theory and practice, mind and ody, personal and political, fact and value or subjective and objective ~are not seen in ‘all-or-nothing’ terms but rather are integrated within a perspective of dynamic tension, It is the balance between them that is important, and which must be main- tained. For a system to lose equilibrium is to risk ecological failure. Therefore one of the problems of the present order is seen as the way in which balance has not been maintained, for example in terms of gender, where the domination and exploitation ‘of women by men has led to imbalance, oppression and the devaluing of women and their consciousness. Similarly, the issue of balance between conflicting cultures has not been adequately addressed, for example the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, which has been one of colonial domination and oppres- sion rather than one of balance and mutual respect. Thus, the ecological principle of equilibrium incorporates a number of the concerns of the Green writers discussed earlier, and relates to issues of gender, culture, peace, conflict and so on. Ecological principle 5: interdependence Dominant social, economic and political narratives value independence. If someone is seen to be ‘dependent’ that is a deficit, and there are policies and programs to encourage that person to become more ‘independent’. While the idea of independence makes some sense from a neo-liberal capitalist perspective, from an ecological perspective it is nonsense. An ecological perspective maintains that there is no such thing as independence; we are all dependent on each other, friends, on institutions, on the economy, food, on the farmers who produce that human being simply does not live on our families, on our on our employer, on the shops where we buy food, on cars or public transport, and soon. The in splendid isolation, but in reality is always ‘Chapter2 Foundations of community development: An ecological perspective | $5 1 elites, who are often the strongest elites, cose from powerful the stock market, fe themselves hi their secretaries or aon te -ds,on Soret al contacts, on their credit cards, their computers, on their person: eae ad ers. Dependency on their lawyers, and on their bank manage rntemational I independence’ makes no sense. This applies also atthe i a that nations are ‘independent’ flies in the face of reality, 85 clearly indicates on each other (e.g, for trade and for the flow of information). History © fies af that a nation that seeks to be truly independent, to isolate itself from a a interdependency with the rest of the world, simply stagnates and does not Su ‘ Yet we perpetuate the myth of nations being ‘independent’, which is not @ healthy stance from which to address global issues. The fallacy of independence, of course, applies not just to human beings or to nations, but is also an important ecological principle throughout the natural world ‘The ecosystem can only exist because of a rich web of interdependence, whereby species and even non-living things depend on each other. Dependency therefore is both normal and desirable, and far from being condemned should be celebrated and encouraged. Building strong bonds of interdependence is important for all commun- ities because, after all, a community is in essence a network of interdependence. The celebration of interdependence, so essential in human community, can also be a way of dependent on others. Even th advocates for ‘independence’, ar ersonal assistant ghily dependent on jr wives/husbands ( their accountants, 1m, and the idea of jevel; to pretend are dependent usually wives), on subverting the dominant discourse of ‘independence’ and asserting an alternative, more ecological, reality. ‘The ecological principle of interdependence emphasises the importance of relation- ship, and suggests that relationships of mutual dependence are in themselves worth- while, The emphasis on relationship was mentioned above, in relation to holism, and it will be discussed further in chapter 4 as part of the notion of relational reality For present purposes, the important point to note is that the ecological principle of interdependence directly implies a concem for relationship. From this perspective, we analyse any situation not from the perspective of understanding its parts (as with the Enlightenment passion for classification), but rather of the web of relationships between thern. ® An ecological perspective: is it enough? ‘The ecological perspective outlined above - based on the five principles of holism, sustainability, diversity, equilibrium and interdependence (and see table 2.2) - incorporates most of the concerns of the different strands of Green writing discussed earlier in the chapter. In addition, the emphasis on holism requires that there be some integration of the different emphases of Green writing; and, while there will inevitably ‘Community Development in an Uncertain World agreement (which itself is valued, according to the principle of diversity), 2 xological approach represented by these five principles represents a reasonable, _eisensus position that would be accepted by the majority of writers or activists sJentitying themselves as Greens, It will therefore serve as the ecological perspective for the model of community development, which is the focus of this book. Given the multiple crises facing the world in the twenty-first century such @ unity development (or of anything cot thereby sufficient. The ecological ntal to perspective is necessary in any model of comm cise, for that matter). But while itis necessary, it isn ‘a number of issues that are fundamer human rights, structural oppression OF al. 2006, Smith 2006). while these and are to some extent implied ~ - this is a weaker position does not specifically tackle community development, including equity, disadvantage and discourses of power (Adger et concerns are not incompatible with a Green positio for example in the commitment to balance, peace and harmeby {implication than would be accepted by people working with disadvantaged groups who ed to bring about a fairer society. An ecological positio® may imply sore degree of social equity, but this is nat necessarily £0 Indeed, a society based on wuthoritarian control and social or economic inequality could well be regarded as ecologically acceptable and as meeting the

    You might also like